A formula for fresh air: Elect Seattle City Council by district

By JOEL CONNELLY, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF

Published 4:31 pm, Sunday, October 7, 2012

Image 1of/3

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 3

The average cost of winning a Seattle City Council seat has gone from $215,000 in 2005 up to more than $270,000 in 2011. The cost of running at-large discourages qualified challengers. Election of council members by district would mean more "retail politics."

Seattle City Councilwoman Jean Godden was one of three challengers who unseated incumbents in 2003. Only a single Council members has been ousted since. Godden was the only incumbent in 2011 to draw significant opposition.

Seattle City Councilmembers Tim Burgess, Sally Clark and Mike O'Brien announce a deal with arena developer Chris Hansen. Hansen hired top-notch lawyers, image-makers and lobbyists to do the deal. The average citizen doesn't get first-rate constituent service from a council spread thin.

An unusual coalition of neighborhood activists, small-business owners and a few legislators thinks it has the right formula to change the stale conformity in Seattle city government: Throw open City Hall by electing seven of nine City Council members by districts rather than at-large.

"Those on the right or left outside an inceasingly narrow band of what's politically acceptable in this town -- for various reasons -- have little or no representation," said John Fox, a longtime activist and one of the agitators behind Seattle Districts Now.

Hell hath no fury like an establishment defending itself. The current interests entrenched at Seattle's arid new City Hall are sure to charge that election by district would "balkanize" the Emerald City (formerly the Queen City), delaying and obstructing the common interest.

Poppycock!

The real worry lies in giving a place(s) at the table to those who would question priorities and property tax burdens. Another fear: City Council members would be forced into constituent services for neighborhoods, instead of sitting on $300,000 re-election war chests that scare away citywide challengers.

Joel Connelly has been a staff columnist for more than 30 years. He comments regularly on politics and public policy.

And consider what prolongs the already ponderous "Seattle way" of making decisions. The "narrow band" at City Hall decides on a course of action. Folks getting screwed learn too late or after the fact. They go to court to stop results of the greased process from which they were excluded.

If Seattle Districts Now gets its way -- it needs 30,943 valid voter signatures to put a Charter Amendment on the 2013 ballot -- you would have a mix at the table.

The mayor and two council members would be elected citywide. The seven other council members would come from distinct neighborhoods, e.g. West Seattle, Magnolia-Queen Anne-Downtown, Ballard-Crown Hill, etc., under a boundary plan drawn up by renowned UW demographer Dr. Richard Morrill.

All of the city, including those who get benefits and those who pay bills, would be represented. "District elections aren't a guarantee, but an essential prerequisite for diverse viewpoints to be heard and represented now at City Hall," Fox added.

Questions need asking: Why, for instance, has a city with a $950 million budget invested $100 million in the infrastructure surrounding Paul Allen's South Lake Union? Why have city fathers (and mothers) turned to property taxes to support such basic city services as libraries?

When in Seattle, my route into work goes down a bumpy Union Street. It was the site, seven years ago, of "Fix This Street" signs touting the city's Bridging the Gap levy. It hasn't been fixed. Along the way, I pass a ripped-up Broadway, with millions being spent -- plus lanes and parking spaces eliminated -- for the First Hill trolley.

What could have been done to maintain and enhance city services -- without gold-plated property tax levies -- if money for follies -- oops, trolleys -- and the Mercer Corridor remake were invested in decaying bridges, sidewalks, libraries and streets?

Seattle City Council members get small staffs to cover a very big city. The result: Citizens with a beef or an inconvenience often get blown off. Heck, to the average citizen, Seattle city government is in the business of creating inconveniences.

After being blown off, those acquainted with a City Council member hear a familiar response: "Oh, we didn't KNOW it was you." The implication: Campaign contributors, self-important political bloggers, media folk and political activists who identify themselves get service.

Chicago's 14th Ward Alderman Edward Burke is a power in Illinois and national Democratic politics, chair of his council's finance committee, head of a Democratic panel that slates judicial candidates, and is married to an Illinois Supreme Court justice.

Yet, Burke once delayed seeing a group of national reporters, yours truly included, so he could cuss out a contractor who had messed up (endlessly, Seattle-style) a street in the 14th Ward. He had to get this done for "my people," Burke explained to us, because said folk are his power base.

We'd never elect Ed Burke here. With district elections, however, our council members "would have to tend to people in their neighborhoods; it would bring government closer to people, which is important in delivering city services," said Eugene Wasserman, a Seattle Districts Now booster.

Sure, there's a tradeoff.

We'd probably get fewer resolutions condemning the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, or endorsing the Occupy movement -- and not the usual 19 "whereas" clauses -- if City Council members Nick Licata and Mike O'Brien were out demanding explanations for a mess in their neighborhoods.

Seattle has ousted just one council member in the past four elections. Voting by district would lower costs and boost turnover. The average price tag for winning a City Council seat in 2011 was $270,000.

"Retail politics," use of doorbelling and volunteers, counts far more if you have 86,000 constituents rather than 600,000. As Wasserman put it, "You can hold somebody accountable by outworking them, not outspending them."

The city rejected district elections in 1975, 1995 and 2003, mostly because the full City Council would have been elected by district. Seattle Districts Now has a different formula, seven by district and two at-large.

Seattle would be following a trio of Western cities -- San Francisco, San Diego and Denver -- that have gone to district elections.